One-year outcomes from the TAXUS express stent versus cypher stent

Propensity score matched lesion-based comparison of long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes after placement of sirolimus (Cypher Bx Velocity) and paclitaxel (TAXUS Express)-eluting stents for de novo native coronary stenosis

Long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes after sirolimus (SES: Cypher Bx Velocity) and paclitaxel (PES: TAXUS Express)-eluting stent implantation were firstly compared in Japan. During PES-available period from May 2007 to February 2009, 1068 nonrandomized consecutive de novo native coronary lesions treated either with a PES (682 lesions) or SES were enrolled in this study, and a retrospective examination was conducted in April 2013. During that interval, the use ratio of drug-eluting stent (i.e. SES plus PES) was 94.2 %. By adjusting the baselines with a propensity score matching analysis produced 383 lesions in each arm, the incidence of the clinical endpoint (1500-day cardiac death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis) after placement of SES (2.1 %; mean follow-up, 1400 ± 290 days) was not significantly different from that in the PES group (2.6 %; 1394 ± 325 days, p = 0.637). SES did not relate to the clinical endpoint (hazard ratio 1.04; 95 % CI 0.29-3.76; p = 0.949). In the baseline-adjusted angiographic followed up lesions (n = 234 in each arm), the incidence of binary restenosis (percent diameter stenosis [%DS] >50 %) in the SES group (12.0 %; mean follow-up, 477 ± 281 days) was not significantly different from that in the PES group (14.5 %; 497 ± 341 days, p = 0.431). SES did not relate to binary restenosis (Odds ratio 0.73; 95 % CI 0.40-1.32; p = 0.295). In conclusion, the present propensity score matched lesion-based analysis firstly showed the statistical equivalent long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes after either SES or PES placement for de novo native coronary lesion in Japanese patients in a daily practice environment.

Propensity score-matched lesion-based comparison of mid-term angiographic outcomes of TAXUS Liberté with Cypher Bx Velocity stents for de novo native coronary stenosis and in patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVE

We sought to perform a propensity score-matched lesion-based comparison of mid-term angiographic outcomes of sirolimus- (SES, Cypher Bx Velocity) and paclitaxel- (PES, TAXUS Liberté, the 2nd-generation TAXUS) eluting stents to treat de novo coronary stenosis and, particularly, in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) in a daily practice environment.

METHODS

The present study was a non-randomized, retrospective, lesion-based, single center study that included 1,287 de novo native coronary stenosis cases after successful SES or PES placement between February 2007 and April 2011. The primary endpoint was angiographic-based binary in-stent restenosis (% diameter stenosis >50 at secondary angiogram) within 550 days of placement. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to adjust the baselines.

RESULTS

Among 360 baseline-adjusted angiographic lesions followed up in each arm, the incidence of the primary endpoint in the PES group (11.7%, follow-up period: 350±76 days) was not significantly different from that in the SES group (10.3%, p=0.645, 354±81 days, p=0.912). PES was not associated with the primary endpoint by logistic regression analysis (odds ratio: 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.68-1.93, p=0.605). In the DM specific sub-analysis, the primary endpoint in the PES group (19.6%) was not significantly different from that in the SES group (12.8%, p=0.105) in 148 baseline-adjusted lesions in each arm.

CONCLUSION

The mid-term angiographic outcomes after TAXUS Liberté placement for all-comer de novo native coronary stenosis and in patients with DM were not significantly different from those of SES in a Japanese daily practice environment.

The SPIRIT V diabetic study: a randomized clinical evaluation of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent vs the TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent in diabetic patients with de novo coronary artery lesions

BACKGROUND

Diabetic patients respond less favorably to revascularization and have poorer long-term outcomes. Our main aim was to evaluate the angiographic efficacy of XIENCE V (everolimus-eluting stent, or EES) in diabetic patients compared with TAXUS Liberté (paclitaxel-eluting stent, or PES).

METHODS

The SPIRIT V Diabetic Study was a prospective, single-blind, randomized study that enrolled 324 diabetic (insulin and non-insulin dependent) patients at 28 sites in Europe and Asia Pacific. Randomization was 2:1 between EES (n = 218) and PES (n = 106). The primary end point was sequential noninferiority and superiority of EES for in-stent late loss at 9 months. Secondary clinical end points included stent thrombosis, death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rates up to 1 year.

RESULTS

Everolimus-eluting stent was superior to PES for in-stent late loss at 9 months (0.19 mm vs 0.39 mm, respectively; P(superiority) = .0001). The composite rate of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization was the same in the 2 groups at 1 year (16.3% vs 16.4%). No stent thromboses (Academic Research Consortium definite and probable) were seen through 1 year with EES compared with 2 of 104 (2%) with PES (P = .11).

CONCLUSION

In this prospective, randomized trial in a high-risk group of diabetic patients, implantation of EES compared with PES resulted in significantly better inhibition of intimal hyperplasia with a comparable safety outcome.

Three-year outcomes following sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in an unselected population with coronary artery disease (from the REWARDS Registry)

The Registry Experience at the Washington Hospital Center with Drug-Eluting Stents (REWARDS) study includes unselected patients with coronary artery disease treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs; n = 2,392) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES; n = 1,119). This study aimed to examine the long-term safety profile of the 2 stents in a "real-world" population, especially in relation to stent thrombosis, and to compare differences in the diabetic cohort. Patients were followed for 3 years with regard to major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Rates of stent thrombosis were also studied. Baseline characteristics were similar between stents. Although MACE rates at 3 years were similar (SES 28.1% vs PES 28.9%, p = 0.62), there was a significant difference in unadjusted rates of target lesion revascularization (SES 15.6% vs PES 12.6%, p = 0.03), death (SES 15.7% vs PES 19.0%, p = 0.02), and Q-wave myocardial infarction (SES 0.8% vs PES 2.1%, p = 0.003). After multivariable Cox regression to adjust for confounders, there was no significant difference in overall MACEs. Incidence of stent thrombosis was higher in the SES group (SES 2.2% vs PES 1.6%, p = 0.22), but this was not statistically significant (hazard ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 0.8 to 2.9, p = 0.17). Overall, diabetics had a higher MACE rate, but there was no difference between insulin- and noninsulin-dependent diabetics. In conclusion, at 3 years, PES and SES achieved similar results in MACEs and stent thrombosis. This should foster confidence that SES or PES can be compared to second-generation drug-eluting stents without concerns for safety or efficacy.